Brian said, “If you join the ends of the “Spider Hitch Knot” it quite easily can be “untied” to become a simple circle of cord. This is called a Null Knot”
Ahhh … yes, we agree again! Here we are talking about the case where the ends are being narrowly defined as the ends of the cord and not the more general case where the ends are recognised as being the working end and the standing end of the knot construct.
But I’m more confused now. If we take such a narrow interpretation and, in my attempt to create a reliable circle of dental floss, I see I’ve been using the wrong ends of the floss as the wend end for the Spiderhitch. But, is it not still a Spiderhitch if I use the separated ends as the wend end and leave the send end as the loop rather than the wend end?
But again, and in any case, is it not also the case that a null knot is not a knot but that a null knot is a knot that is not?
Wend will it all end? I think I’m starting to go round in circles and, since that is what I was seeking in the beginning, I’m well satisfied.
Many Thanks Brian. You have given me much to think about.
While not understanding how the Spider Hitch (a loopknot, which would be a “knot”
by some distinctions and not a hitch by any but anglers’ … ?) can serve the OP’s
problem of joining two ends to make a circle (is it being proposed to ring-load the knot?),
I find this “topological”/ “wend”/“stend” chatter getting further confused.
To the question of similarity between Spider & Stevedore, they differ in the one being
formed with a bight to make an eye, and with the tuck of that coming in the orientation
for the Overhand-Fig.9-Fig.11-Fig.<2n+1> series, vs. the other orientation being in the
Fig.8-10-<2n> series. (Some books show a Fig.9 as the Stevedore, mistakenly.)
But so far as I can glean from instructions & images, the physical arrangement of the
wraps is different, in that those of the Stevedore are expected to go away from the
small eye (where end is tucked), but those of the Spider are to half go away and the
later half to come back over the first, to cascade towards the eye upon setting,
with the hope of imparting a twist in the SPart.
A common problem with anglers’ knots is that images of them are usually vague,
to the point that I surmise that many of those presenting them don’t actually know
WHAT the knot is supposed to look like–so they fudge it with a tiny scribble.
(And this might explain some of the conflicting indications of strength–actually from
differently dressed/formed knots!)
Before one can talk about topological qualities of practical knots, one needs some
rule for obtaining the t. form. Consider the Bwl: how is the end + SPart union
made? --different results from the two possible connections.
(A separate problem is determining equality: some things can sure look different,
and moving from one to the other seem impossible, and yet can be done!
Ashley’s “Tweenie” (#525) is in fact what is called a “Fig.9” form–the Overhand
with one full turn more, or the Fig.8 with one half-turn more. But moving from
the elongated, asymmetric form to the symmetric one of 525 is tricky! And there
are actually TWO symmetric forms that this extended series can take. --a good way
to get a headache, trying to manipulate the transition from one to the other!
“loop” is one of the most overused knotting terms, and so results in continual
confusion, ambiguity; I take the problem here to be joining ends of slick thin tiny
tape to make a circle of the stuff (to what end, though? --could make it easier
to use in the mouth (which could lead to making it more likely to be used!)).
Well, thank you for an exercise in most frustrating material!!
Is this going to get us to give up flossing?
In any case, the most obvious solution to my mind to bend to ends of this slick,
tiny tape together is the Blood bend/knot–both for security AND easy tying!
(Did I say “easy”? >:( )
Well, if you have some tweezers, you can bring each line around on opposite sides
of the tweezer end (or some other device that can pull ends with), and make
relatively easy wraps of the ends around the opposing SPart and then bring both
ends together to be tweezed-nipped and thus pulled through the center point,
and then draw up the knot carefully (perhaps maintaining grip on the ends until
the knot body tightens enough to hold them).
And maybe the Fisherman’s would work were one to finish it with the extension
of tucking the ends back down between the two lines at the center before
pulling the Overhand components tight against each other. (worked for me)
Perhaps some of the knots you found wanting might also work if you take care
to hold the ends while tightening–which can be hard to do in this material.
Well, I’m impressed that you can find Rosendahl’s “Zeppelin” bend to be the
best of the lot–seems a bother to tie in the fiddly stuff. (And a bigger bother to
UNtie, as I wanted to do in order to try another knot–finally did so by loading it and
one end slipped out; the other’s Overhand then needed prodding & a fine point.)
“a pink queue” : are you tying a new one each time? --just re-use, like the tooth
brush. Btw, I’ve some of those finger-saving things; my impression is that the line
used (was fibrous, not tape) frayed too quickly, and they aren’t all so handy.
Another idea: turn one end around the opposite SPart, and between your fingers
give this newly formed bight a good twisting (moisten fingers for friction?);
then wrap the opp. SPart (i.e., the one just turned around, so far unknotted) around the
twisted bight (same direction makes sense, at least lest one untwist …) and finish
by tucking this end back between bight head/tip & Spart (a la Sheet Bend, in a way).
Hold both ends and draw up the knot slowly.
You see, I’m looking for easy tying, and for the material ample turns, and a simple
tuck, then careful, all-parts-tensioned setting.
This tape floss is really slick!
: are you tying a new one each time? --just re-use, like the tooth